From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 4 15:24:49 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3813816A4BF for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:24:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.enst.fr (enst.enst.fr [137.194.2.16]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 000ED43FE3 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:24:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cedric.ware@enst.fr) Received: from olympe.enst.fr (olympe.enst.fr [137.194.64.54]) by smtp2.enst.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8579053B11; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 00:24:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: by olympe.enst.fr (Postfix, from userid 14110) id 18A4111083; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 00:24:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 00:24:31 +0200 From: Cedric Ware To: Thomas Stratmann Message-ID: <20030904222430.GA18150@enst.fr> References: <20030904211242.GA22155@fsp1.physik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030904211242.GA22155@fsp1.physik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ext2fs BSD-slice subpartition? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:24:49 -0000 Hello, > I extracted this from the grub sourcecode: [8<] > #define FS_EXT2FS 17 /* Linux Extended 2 file system */ (Actually, this is derived from NetBSD and OpenBSD's disklabel.h.) My current setup uses this, but it's been a while since I installed everything and I haven't the slightest recollection of how I worked around FreeBSD disklabel checking. I may very well have written it by hand to the slice. > source). I don't know about the -CURRENT bsdlabel, I suppose things are > the same. I don't track -CURRENT, but according to: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/sys/disklabel.h.diff?r1=1.72&r2=1.73 it seems that disklabel could accept that value as of 2002/03/28. > Is there any serious objection to supporting this? I'll second your request, the patch looks straightforward enough (6 lines in src/sys/sys/disklabel.h?), at least for -CURRENT (since -STABLE is frozen until 4.9, if I'm not mistaken). Regards, Cedric Ware.